STATE BANK OF INDIA Vs. NAKUL D KAMANI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision application is directed against the order dated 5.2.1990, passed by the learned Sub divisional Judicial Magistrate, Jamshedpur, in C/1 Case No. 2 of 1988, T.R. No. 1786 of 1989 by which the learned Magistrate in exercise of his power under Section 245 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as 'the Code') has discharged the accused opposite party from the charges under Sections 420 and 468 of the Indian Penal Code.

(2.) IT appears that a complaint petition was filed by the complainant petitioner against the accused opposite party for an offence under Sections 420 and 468 of the Indian Penal Code alleging therein, inter alia, that accused opposite party Nakul D. Kamani was the Chairman cum Managing Director of Friends Press Metal Private Ltd. and in such capacity he took over charge from Mrs. Sarswati Devi on 2.6.1986. The accused was authorized by a resolution of the said concern to operate all the Bank accounts of the Company, which was in the State Bank of India, Bisatupur Branch, Jamshedpur. The accused started operating all the accounts of the Company in the Bank, as he was also major share holder of the Company. On 15.5.1987, the complainant petitioner receiver a letter from one P. Guha Thakurta, General Manager cum Director of the Friends Press Metal Pvt. Ltd., along with the copy of resolution of the Company, from which it was gathered that the accused had resigned from the Board of Directors of the said Company and also from the post of Chairman cum Managing Director with effect from 6.4.1987, and his power to operate the Bank accounts was also revoked and the same was delegated upon P. Guha Thakurta. It is further alleged that the copy of the said resolution was deliberately not sent to the complainant with an alterior motive and in the meantime the accused opposite party managed to withdraw a sum of Rs. 4,13,481.80 paise from the Cash Credit Account of the Company by issuing nine cheques. Again the accused even knowing that he was not the Managing Director of the Company signed and issued cheques on 8.4.1987, 10.4.1987 and 11.4.1987 and operated the account of the Bank and withdraw a sum of Rs. 14,383.80 paise, Rs. 15,000/ and Rs. 10,000/ , respectively, from the Cash Credit Account. Again on 10.4.1987 after antedating cheque No. 111017, the accused opposite party withdraw a large amount of Rs. 2,95,000/ . It is further alleged that though the accused was not authorized to operate the Bank Account, he presented a number of bills for its purchase by the complainant and on 11.4.1987 and 13.4.1987, the complainant Bank in good faith purchased the bills and had paid two sums of Rs. 20,841.36 paise and Rs. 51.362.20P, which was 90% of the bills amount of the Company of the accused and thus the accused opposite party dishonestly and fraudulently cheated the complainant Bank by appressing the resolution of the Company, by which he was not entitled to operate the Bank accounts. Thus the accused opposite party for wrongful loss and wrongful gain committed an offence of forgery, as the complainant Bank was suffered substantial financial loss because of the deceptive role played by the accused opposite party.

(3.) MR . Kameshwar Prasad, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, submitted that the learned Magistrate could not have passed the order impugned as there was sufficient materials, which had come on the record by way of evidence to proceed against the accused and the learned Magistrate, while passing the order impugned has allowed the accused to file affidavit in support of its case and thus adopted a procedure quite unknown to law.